Browse Prior Art Database

Comparative system architecture for large, government-sponsored space systems

IP.com Disclosure Number: IPCOM000128075D
Original Publication Date: 1999-Dec-31
Included in the Prior Art Database: 2005-Sep-14
Document File: 4 page(s) / 17K

Publishing Venue

Software Patent Institute

Related People

Smith, Robert Hanson: AUTHOR [+3]

Related Documents

http://theses.mit.edu:80/Dienst/UI/2.0/Describe/0018.mit.theses/1999-55: URL

Abstract

The fundamental issues in any discussion of a proposed system architecture must involve the relative quality of the architecture when compared to other proposals and the architecture's ability to satisfy the needs and abilities of the customer, the system environment and the system developer. While the latter issue can often be easily addressed through standard system architecture methods, the former comparative issue can often be quite difficult due to some of the uncertainty and ambiguity in the' relative merit of system architecture factors. In large government-funded space system architectures, which often span years of development/ production and cost tens of billions of dollars, this difficulty is especially apparent and highlights the need for an effective method for comparative evaluation.

This text was extracted from a PDF file.
This is the abbreviated version, containing approximately 44% of the total text.

Page 1 of 4

 This record is the front matter from a document that appears on a server at MIT and is used through permission from MIT. See http://theses.mit.edu:80/Dienst/UI/2.0/Describe/0018.mit.theses/1999-55 for copyright details and for the full document in image form.

Comparative system architecture for large, government-sponsored space systems

by

Robert Hanson Smith


B. S., texas A&M University, (1986)

Sc. M., Brown University, (1988)

Ph. D., University of Texas, (1991)

Submitted to the System Design and Management Program in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Science in Engineering and Management

at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology

January 1999 [FEBRUARY, 1999]
(c), Robert Hanson Smith, 1999. All rights reserved The author hereby grants to MIT permission to reproduce and to distribute publicly paper and electronic copies of this thesis document in whole or in part SIGNATURE OF author: [[signature omitted]]

System Design and Management January 15, 1998
CERTIFIED BY: [[SIGNATURE OMITTED]]

Edward Crawley

Professor of Aerospace Engineering Thesis Advisor ACCEPTED BY: [[SIGNATURE OMITTED]]

Tom Magnanti Co-Director System Design and Management Program ARCHIVES MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY LIBRARIES APR 12 1999

Massachusetts Institute of Technology Page 1 Dec 31, 1999

Page 2 of 4

Comparative system architecture for large, government-sponsored space systems

Comparative system architecture for large, government-sponsored space systems

by Robert Hanson Smitm

Submitted to the System Design and Management Program on January 15, 1999 in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Engineering and Management

Abstract

The fundamental issues in any discussion of a proposed system architecture must involve the relative quality of the architecture when compared to other proposals and the architecture's ability to satisfy the needs and abilities of the customer, the system environment and the system developer. While the latter issue can often be easily addressed through standard system architecture methods, the former comparative issue can often be quite difficult due to some of the uncertainty and ambiguity in the' relative merit of system architecture factors. In large government-funded space system architectures, which often span years of development/ production and cost tens of billions of dollars, this difficulty is especially apparent and highlights the need for an effective method for comparative evaluation.

This thesis research has developed a unique tool by which comparisons of system architectures can be made. This technique, which is a, fuzzy set extension of the Axiomatic Design method, has the ability to incorporate and capture both technical and nontechnical parameters that are vital to the comparison process. This tool is effectively applied to architectural proposals for the human exploration of Mars. As supporting objectives, the research examines the struc...